Re: [Tagging] Coach parking

On 09/06/2023 10:52, Greg Troxel wrote: Anne- Karoline Distel writes: I came across a case where someone had added name=coach and name=car to amenity=parking, which is obviously not how we do things [snip] I can't find it either. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/name#values allows y

Re: [Tagging] Coach parking

On 09/06/2023 21:21, Anne-Karoline Distel wrote: Since these are all descriptive values in the name which we are not supposed to do, I don't understand what you're trying to say. Two things really - one was in case one of them was your "name=coach" that you thought that you've seen; the othe

Re: [Tagging] Adding 'flood' as value to the key 'hazard' (to be used in combination with the tag boundary=hazard)

On 15/06/2023 16:59, Cornelia Scholz via Tagging wrote: Dear all, I would like to propose to add*'flood'* as value to the *key 'hazard'* (to be used in combination with the tag*boundary=hazard*). ... What already exists is the key flood_prone

Re: [Tagging] Adding 'flood' as value to the key 'hazard' (to be used in combination with the tag boundary=hazard)

On 15/06/2023 20:47, Jez Nicholson wrote: Whilst it is a great idea to capture local knowledge about flooding, especially where it is currently not available, I am concerned that this doesn't have on-the-ground verification. I don't think that anyone has suggested that - at least not in this t

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

On 28/04/2024 15:19, Peter Neale via Tagging wrote: A local Public Bridleway has a few (3, 4 or 5 from Aerial imagery) steps going down before it passes under a road bridge, and a similar number up again on the other side. How can I best tag this? According to the wiki, "highway=steps" seems

Re: [Tagging] How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway

On 28/04/2024 23:09, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: ... how do horses handle the steps in the bridleway? better than cyclists :) Lots of historic bridleways in hilly areas in England are quite steep, and often steps have been added for foot access to stop hikers sliding down the slope. Sometimes

[Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags (was: Re: How to Tag Steps in a Bridleway)

On 29/04/2024 16:22, Jass Kurn wrote: On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 at 10:03, Peter Neale via Tagging wrote: It is "bicycles=yes" and not "bicycles=designated" because, for a bridleway https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbridleway "Cyclists also have a right, unless the local

Re: [Tagging] Difference between "yes" and "designated" in access tags

On 30/04/2024 14:51, Jass Kurn wrote: Need to point out for others reading this than I am in England, and influenced by what I believe was likely the original intent of these tags, that is mapping of the "English/Welsh, rights of way" I've always treated " foot|bicycle|horse=yes, as a means of

Re: [Tagging] Reviving the path discussion - the increasing, importance of trails in OSM

On 02/06/2020 13:48, Volker Schmidt wrote: On Tue, 2 Jun 2020 at 09:04, Daniel Westergren > wrote: I think the reason that this is so messed up because of the desire to tag according to function.   A trail/path can have many users/functions, b

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Should we map things that do not exist?

On 06/06/2020 16:18, Phake Nick wrote: 在 2020年6月6日週六 11:03，Warin <61sundow...@gmail.com > 寫道： As a general tourist I would have no interest in traveling along a railway route here nothing remains of the railway. OSM is not *only* for general tourist.

Re: [Tagging] Is there any case of valid numeric addr:housename - for example addr:housename?

On 30/06/2020 14:06, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: We have 15000 addresses such as addr:housename=3 ( http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/VBS ) Is there some chance that any of them is valid? Because it seems to me that editors should complain about addr:housename with just numbers. Any?  Qu

Re: [Tagging] site relations for city walls?

On 12/07/2020 20:13, Taskar Center wrote: Why is the relation type on the Berlin Wall a “collection” rather than “boundary”? Over its history as an object in OSM it's had a whole variety of tags.  Different people have said "This is important!  We should render it!" and have sometimes tried

Re: [Tagging] Waterway equivalent of noexit=yes?

On 18/07/2020 19:41, Alan Mackie wrote: On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 at 19:09, Paul Allen > wrote: On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 at 18:53, Tod Fitch mailto:t...@fitchfamily.org>> wrote: What I’d like is one or two tags to indicate that all visible indications of

Re: [Tagging] Hiking "guideposts" painted on rocks, trees etc.

On 21/07/2020 12:04, Michal Fabík wrote: Hi, in some parts of the world, it's common practice to paint guidepost information (destinations, distances etc.) on rock faces, trees, walls and similar existing surfaces, rather than use purpose-made plates attached to a pole. (Example: https://osm.

Re: [Tagging] Hiking "guideposts" painted on rocks, trees etc.

On 21/07/2020 20:37, pangoSE wrote: Andy Townsend skrev: (21 juli 2020 13:31:45 CEST) I've also been trying to add these (both guideposts and route markers) to the relevant hiking route relation. That does not sound right to me. Why would you do that? How would you indicate which rel

Re: [Tagging] Hiking "guideposts" painted on rocks, trees etc.

On 22/07/2020 16:08, pangoSE wrote: I suggest you add the guidepost to a node on the path instead. Please don't do this.  If there's a gate on one side of the road you wouldn't add that gate to the road itself, would you? I really think it would be nice to be able to say query and list all

Re: [Tagging] Finger- or guide-post text

On 17/07/2020 16:24, Jan Michel wrote: Hi Andy, we already have (not well documented) tags for this: Either you use destination_sign relations as Sarah pointed out. Or, if you prefer a more simple approach, there are eight defined keys to add the information with approximate directions: dire

Re: [Tagging] Hiking "guideposts" painted on rocks, trees etc.

(re adding guideposts to route relations) On 21/07/2020 22:18, Peter Elderson wrote: I think the Why question comes first! Why do people in OSM map anything?  I can't see any reason why I'd want to add urban buildings, or comprehensive address data, or a whole bunch of other things that peo

Re: [Tagging] Hiking "guideposts" painted on rocks, trees etc.

On 25/07/2020 17:21, Matthew Woehlke wrote: On 25/07/2020 07.06, Andy Townsend wrote: Why do people in OSM map anything?  I can't see any reason why I'd want to add urban buildings, or comprehensive address data, or a whole bunch of other things that people think are _really importan

Re: [Tagging] Rio de la Plata edit war

On 26/05/2020 00:20, Alan Mackie wrote: Has this edit war stabilised? Apparently it has been blocking coastline updates across the whole world for /months /now. https://osmdata.openstreetmap.de/data/land-polygons.html https://github.

[Tagging] PTv2 public_transport=stop_position for stop positions that vary based on train length

Hello, This is a question that actually arose out of a "how to tag" argument that's come to the attention of the DWG in the USA, but it's actually easy to describe in terms of data in the UK that I'm familiar with, so I'll do that. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12004813 is a "public_tr

Re: [Tagging] PTv2 public_transport=stop_position for stop positions that vary based on train length

On 12/08/2020 01:37, 80hnhtv4agou--- via Tagging wrote: i have been to 11 stations in the last 3 weeks, the trains are not doing what the tags represent If you've done this, and care that stop positions are mapped in the correct place, then I'd suggest that you actually map these stop positio

Re: [Tagging] Benches and hostile architecture

On 23/08/2020 21:22, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: The term "hostile architecture" is too vague. It is the normal British English (at least) description of this stuff. Best Regards, Andy ___ Tagging mailing list Tagging@openstreetmap.org https://lists.

Re: [Tagging] bridge:name and tunnel:name

On 24/08/2020 01:12, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Sun, 23 Aug 2020 at 23:45, Paul Allen > wrote: Theyargued that name should be the name of the road and bridge:name should be used for the name of the bridge.  Which did nothing to change all the exi

Re: [Tagging] tagging for fairgrounds

On 27/08/2020 17:04, Richard Welty wrote: so i'd like to propose one of these two "fairgrounds" is more of an American rather than a British English way of referring to these sorts of things, I think.  See https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2020-February/thread.html#24188 for

Re: [Tagging] Powerbank Sharing Systems

On 19/09/2020 11:59, Jake Edmonds via Tagging wrote: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Powerbank-sharing_systems_by_name https://heychimpy.com https://www.wecharge.me I can’t see any tagging related to powerbank sharing systems. Have you tried searching OSM data by name using Tagi

Re: [Tagging] Powerbank Sharing Systems

On 19/09/2020 11:59, Jake Edmonds via Tagging wrote: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Powerbank-sharing_systems_by_name https://heychimpy.com https://www.wecharge.me I can’t see any tagging related to powerbank sharing systems. You might be able to find some of them if you search

Re: [Tagging] Powerbank Sharing Systems

On 19/09/2020 12:47, Jake Edmonds via Tagging wrote: Maybe a proposal that needs voting on isn’t need but is it accepted to add things to the wiki without one? People certainly do do that (an example that comes to mind is https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:verge ).  I don't see a problem

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (shop=direct marketing)

On 02/10/2020 08:58, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: On 10/1/20 14:46, Wieland Kestler wrote: Hi everyone! Due to the discussion in the german OSM-Telegram-group I made a proposal for tagging points where people can buy e.g. game (meat) directly from the forester. For more details see the prop

Re: [Tagging] RFC: vaccination / COVID-19 vaccination centres

On 25/11/2020 12:54, Phake Nick wrote: I don't think it is appropriate to add one-off temporary facilities into OSM. As soon as you do the sums it seems pretty unlikely that these will be "one-off temporary facilities". Governments and health authorities may be able to move to a more "busin

Re: [Tagging] coastline v. water

de. In such cases the DWG often reverts to the "status quo ante", and we think that makes sense here too. Best Regards, Andy Townsend, on behalf of the Data Working Group On 18/11/2020 20:19, Eric H. Christensen via Tagging wrote: After a few days of much work, a recent collaborat

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Hazards

On 27/11/2020 04:25, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote: Assuming that the boundary of that area is reasonably permanent, my first reaction is that this could be described by military=danger_area.  However, that tag requires landuse=military as the primary tag, which probably isn't correct here. On

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Digest, Vol 134, Issue 130 animal tracks ?

On 03/12/2020 10:47, ael via Tagging wrote: On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 11:08:55PM +, Paul Allen wrote: Which then goes back to the discussions we were having a while back about tagging the "dangerousness" of tracks. hazard=extreme surely? Actually, https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/

Re: [Tagging] edit war related to tagging of a bus-only major road

On 09/12/2020 14:36, Michael Tsang wrote: Dear all, I'm working with some roads in Central area in Hong Kong. Des Voeux Road Central is considered one of the most important roads in the area which I tagged it as highway=secondary, however another editor has repeatedly changed it to highway=servi

Re: [Tagging] natural=fell not rendered, alternatives?

On 21/12/2020 07:39, Anders Torger wrote: Hello, I'm doing further mapping of Swedish national parks, now in the mountains, and I have noted that natural=fell (habitat over tree line) is not rendered. Looking into why it seems that OSM-Carto implementors want more specific landcover tags to

Re: [Tagging] Fuzzy areas again: should we have them or not?

Hi all, I'll reply to this as me since the DWG's ticketing system was cc:ed on this mail and we can't reply from there because the messages will bounce. On 21/12/2020 15:42, Brian M. Sperlongano wrote: On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 8:01 AM Frederik Ramm > wrote:

Re: [Tagging] feature Proposal - Voting - settlement_type=crannog

On 07/10/2022 11:27, Marc_marc wrote: Hello, Le 07.10.22 à 12:11, Martin Koppenhoefer a écrit : who cares for "in use" or "approved" me :) approved that means that the subject has been discussed, that people have spent time on it, that there has been an opportunity to detect problems, to pr

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Historic

On 11/10/2022 14:54, Anne-Karoline Distel wrote: Obviously, I support this. It has its own preset scheme in the iD editor, its own icons etc. The following are missing (of the top of my head, because I proposed them) from the list and were approved already: creamery

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

On 11/10/2022 19:34, Evan Carroll wrote: Some examples of these nameless sections are, * w1101484647 by A_Prokopova_lyft That was added in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/127101982 , which was that user's first edit in OSM. I'd suggest asking them in the changeset about that edit, i

Re: [Tagging] Lyft and nameless sectioning in OSM

On 12/10/2022 18:56, Evan Carroll wrote: But in some places, mappers have been more rigorous about respecting each building's architectural origins. This is all 100% new to me.  Where is it documented that a "shop" in a detached house should be mapped as a detached house, and not

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - man made=evaporation tower

On 20/10/2022 20:36, Illia Marchenko wrote: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/man_made%3Devaporation_tower чт, 20 окт. 2022 г., 22:25 Illia Marchenko : Please give link :-) чт, 20 окт. 2022 г., 20:57 Kamil Kulawik : Hi! Voting has started for evapo

Re: [Tagging] Window tinting?

On 20/10/2022 20:34, Illia Marchenko wrote: Maybe craft=window_construction? wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:craft=window_construction No, because it's not that. There are a few dozen examples in taginfo: https://taginfo.open

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - archaeological_site

On 22/10/2022 11:44, Anne-Karoline Distel wrote: Following the rejection of the crannog proposal with the concern about the hierarchy above the proposed tag, I now propose to change the key from site_type to archaeological_type for reasons laid out under "Rationale": https://wiki.openstreetmap.o

Re: [Tagging] RFC - Proposed features/emergency=lifeboat station

On 23/11/2022 22:23, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: But we're supposed to be tagging the base / buildings, not the boat itself. Why not both? Taking an example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8321217532 * amenity = lifeboat * emergency = marine_rescue * lifeboat = offshore * lifeboat:cl

Re: [Tagging] plantation=yes?

On 10/12/2022 18:23, Mark Wagner wrote: As actually used on the map, "natural=wood" and "landuse=forest" are synonyms. Depends on the map - if there are no other tags https://map.atownsend.org.uk will show "landuse=forest" in a lighter green to "natural=wood" (to indicate "forestry"; it also

Re: [Tagging] Homogenize diplomatic tags

29 janv. 2022 à 07:17, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging a écrit : Jan 28, 2022, 23:37 by graemefi...@gmail.com: On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 at 04:57, Andy Townsend wrote: * An OSMer with considerable experience of this area has written about this in the p

Re: [Tagging] RFC - Proposed features/emergency=lifeboat station

On 15/12/2022 23:34, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: & it's also a shame that they couldn't have been mentioned as unresolved when I said twice that it was ready to go to voting! I think that any "reading of the room" yesterday (when it was moved to voting) would suggest that the issues raised 6/

Re: [Tagging] RFC - Proposed features/emergency=lifeboat station

On 16/12/2022 01:51, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Fri, 16 Dec 2022 at 10:59, Andy Townsend wrote: doesn't explain why "amenity=lifeboat" is "deprecated".  Like it or not, this is used exactly how you'd expect: https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map

Re: [Tagging] Homogenize diplomatic tags

On 16/12/2022 07:33, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: If this edit was in violation of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct then I would recommend notifying DWG (for the avoidance of any doubt) I am a member of the DWG, but this was not raised with the DWG as

Re: [Tagging] Homogenize diplomatic tags

On 17/12/2022 11:03, Georges Dutreix via Tagging wrote: Hello, As proposed, I continue here our discussion started on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117329397 Thanks You suggest to modify something in the wiki, I am ready to participate, but please I will need a guidance since I do

Re: [Tagging] Private ambulance / patient transport service

On 03/01/2023 22:42, Illia Marchenko wrote: Graeme Fitzpatrick : A suggestion on the forum of amenity=training for the first-air training side of things + a description of everything else. Note that the proposal for  amenity =training was rejected. wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_

Re: [Tagging] Change emergency=lifeboat-station to water-rescue

On 04/01/2023 06:16, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: With Christmas over, & the start of a new month, thought it must be time to revisit https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/emergency%3Dlifeboat_station ... Could I please ask for your feedback on the basic idea? I suspect that

Re: [Tagging] Change emergency=lifeboat-station to water-rescue

On 11/01/2023 23:10, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: On Fri, 6 Jan 2023 at 14:19, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: New proposal done: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/emergency%3Dwater_rescue Everything is quiet! :-) Does that mean that people are happy with how it looks?

Re: [Tagging] caravans en-de inconsistency

On 18/01/2023 23:15, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: When I created https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dcaravan, I defined them as: "recreational vehicles such as towed caravans (a.k.a travel trailers, pop-tops, camper trailers, tent trailers, 5th wheelers etc); powered, self-propelled m

Re: [Tagging] leisure=practice_pitch a bad idea because too overspecific for a main tag ?

On 31/01/2023 22:05, Graeme Fitzpatrick wrote: But iD, at least, when tagging basketball "pitches" asks for the number of hoops, with 1 as an option. Does that info then go anywhere downstream? Apparently: https://master.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org/way/4305950698 hoops

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - Replace `*:signed` suffix key with `signed:*` prefix key

On 01/02/2023 16:08, Marc_marc wrote: you can obviously just set unsigned=A;B I've got to admit, I didn't see that one coming! "unsigned=yes" is way ahead of all other "unsigned=" uses (see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/unsigned#values ). However, 24 people have used "unsigned=name"

Re: [Tagging] [Talk-us] New MapRoulette Challenge - Add Surface to Highways

On 2/3/23 09:16, Walker Kosmidou-Bradley wrote: I use routing to measure accessibility to schools and health clinics here in west Africa. I have to make sure that my models also work in South Asia. Having the surface tag attributed makes processing infinitely easier because I don’t have to adj

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - landcover proposal V2

> By the way, I saw some changes leading to x10 contribution rates and be criticized as disrupting longstanding practices or established tagging. An actual example would be really useful here. > Establishment nor longstanding practices shouldn't be valid reasons on their own to justify decisio

Re: [Tagging] Combining "locked=yes" with various access tags

On 21/02/2023 14:34, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: Feb 21, 2023, 15:24 by zeev.stad...@gmail.com: 1. As far as non-emergency routing, the "locked" tag should be ignored. 2. A "locked=no" tag indicates that a legal access restriction is not enforced by a lock

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - EV Charging Station Mapping

On 30/03/2023 09:25, NKA mapper wrote: The definition of amenity =charging_station  will change slightly and will represent both locations with a single charge point and locatio

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - EV Charging Station Mapping

On 30/03/2023 18:13, NKA mapper wrote: tor. 30. mar. 2023 kl. 18:14 skrev Andy Townsend : How do I know if an "amenity=charging_station" in the OSM data is a "single charge point" or a "group of chargers"? The intention is to not have a difference. Both a

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - EV Charging Station Mapping

On 31/03/2023 07:18, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: How you distinguish "marks group of chargers" and "marks single charger" within group of chargers" now? I don't, because currently it either marks "some chargers" (where there is no more detail) or "individual chargers" (where there i

Re: [Tagging] [RFC] Feature Proposal - EV Charging Station Mapping

On 31/03/2023 07:10, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: I guess that in such cases it may be possible to tag it both as charging station and a charge point at the same time? That'd work - it makes it clear that this is a "new" amenity=charging_station (e.g. a "group of chargers", even if th

Re: [Tagging] Status of clothes=motorcycle

On 06/04/2023 09:46, Illia Marchenko wrote: One of the wiki editors (Rtfm) insists that the clothes=motorcycle tag has been deprecated in favor of motorcycle:clothes=yes. For me it's not. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/2499835 See also https://community.openstreetmap.or

Re: [Tagging] Is tagging of fuel: assumed to be exhaustive?

On 18/04/2023 17:26, Mateusz Konieczny via Tagging wrote: Apr 18, 2023, 17:39 by p...@trigpoint.me.uk: I have come across a few cases where a mapper has has blindly answered no to a list of octane ratings that do not exist in the country they are mapping in. In the UK it is sa

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Approved - EV Charging Station Mapping

On 03/05/2023 08:28, Marc_marc wrote: I don't see how an algo will detect that 2 objects amenity=charging_station represent 2 sites on the same parking (and are therefore valid in the new schema) and not 2 charging stations on the same site (which would have to be changed to man_made=charging_s

[Tagging] Edits to "names" page following last year's discussion (was: Re: I am reverting an edit to the "Names" page on the Wiki)

Sorry to dredge this up again, but what seems to have happened is: Some edits to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names by https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Bgo_eiu were reverted https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Names&type=revision&diff=2368644&oldid=2351644 and there

Re: [Tagging] office=healthcare deprecated or bad documentation ?

On 12/05/2023 21:16, Marc_marc wrote: Hello, in 2020, the wiki was changed [|] for this tag (I don't remeber that we talk about it, no link in the comment of the change) [1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Tag:office%3Dhealthcare&diff=prev&oldid=2062630 See also discussion a

Re: [Tagging] tag templates in the wiki

On 12/08/2019 00:05, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Is it now unavoidable that the info box content on tag definition pages in the wiki comes from the database? Is there consensus that the higher complexity to edit it is less important than the features we gain from it I don't think it's unavoid

Re: [Tagging] Merging tagging scheme on wiki pages of Hiking, route=hiking, route=foot and Walking routes

On 15/08/2019 10:56, Peter Elderson wrote: ... So the lowest level always contains only ways, the higher level contains only relations. Please don't make things more complicated than they need to be. Most hiking routes are just a single relation and are best left that way. The ways in th

[Tagging] Route sorting (was: Merging tagging scheme on wiki pages of Hiking, route=hiking, route=foot and Walking routes)

On 15/08/2019 16:18, Peter Elderson wrote: Still most problems arise because ID edits damage routes. An unsorted route in OSM is not damaged.  If your software cannot deal with unsorted routes then it cannot deal with many routes currently in OSM. Please don't try and propagate the madness

Re: [Tagging] Keys to which new values can be added without a proposal: craft=, shop=, building=, office=, sport=?

On 15/08/2019 14:26, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: How about "craft=artist" then? The tag "craft=atelier" was described as for any type of artist: "workshop of a ...professional artist in the fine or decorative arts" "craft=artist" is much better in my view - people are far more likely to know what

Re: [Tagging] Route sorting

On 15/08/2019 17:04, Peter Elderson wrote: Not talking about simple unsorted, but made unsortable. Enter a roundabout of pedestrian area into a route, extend a road, shift another - and you can'sort it. any more. I'm talking daily experience here. Presumably you're talking about some softwa

Re: [Tagging] Roles of route members (was: Merging tagging scheme on wiki pages of Hiking, ...)

On 16/08/2019 08:50, Peter Elderson wrote: Josm of course. Is there another relation editor that can handle large nested route relations spanning up to say 4000 Km? P2 can, at least.  Other people seem to suggest that iD does a reasonable job now too. The more interesting question, though,

Re: [Tagging] Merging tagging scheme on wiki pages of Hiking, route=hiking, route=foot and Walking routes

On 16/08/2019 20:00, Paul Allen wrote: On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 19:43, s8evq > wrote: [1] [make it more clear that the walking route has to be signed in order to map it. As it is stated now, you could read it that a named hiking route is sufficient to be mappe

Re: [Tagging] Roles of route members (was: Merging tagging scheme on wiki pages of Hiking, ...)

On 17/08/2019 07:28, Peter Elderson wrote: Gpx gaps in some software do show up as straight lines. If it's just a missing piece and the rest is in order, no problem. In the case of the E2 in Yorkshire, lots of straight lines. Feed that to a navigation device and it will have you start in Must

Re: [Tagging] Roles of route members (was: Merging tagging scheme on wiki pages of Hiking, ...)

> but I would like to see one make a plausible navigation route out of the E2 > Yorkshire relation as it is now. Where are you going from and where are you going to?  Without that information "make a plausible navigation route out of the E2 Yorkshire relation" makes no sense.  You could certa

Re: [Tagging] Roles of route members (was: Merging tagging scheme on wiki pages of Hiking, ...)

You haven't answered the question - I asked "Where are you going from and where are you going to?" in order to try and understand what real-life problem you're trying to solve. "I would like the ways of a relation to be sorted" is not a real-life problem.  What navigation software are you using an

Re: [Tagging] Roles of route members (was: Merging tagging scheme on wiki pages of Hiking, ...)

> apps like OsmAnd, Garmin devices, and planner applicationsI can answer the Garmin bit of that, as it's something that I do all the time.Firstly, the ability to "

Re: [Tagging] Roles of route members (was: Merging tagging scheme on wiki pages of Hiking, ...)

> You want to do the routing. I want to avoid that, because the routing has already been done. To be clear, I want to navigate from where I currently am to where I

Re: [Tagging] Roles of route members (was: Merging tagging scheme on wiki pages of Hiking, ...)

On 19/08/2019 17:21, Peter Elderson wrote:  the only way for the likes of me is to use detection tools and maintenance tools to order data by hand at the mapping level, so ordinary people can use waymarkedtrails to get usable linear gpx-s for their basecamps, route editors, trip planners, navig

Re: [Tagging] Signposts in Roles of route members

On 19/08/2019 09:50, Volker Schmidt wrote: Let me also introduce a further complication in the "sorting" discussion for hiking and cycling route relations. Some mappers like the idea to keep signposts in the same route relation as the ways making up the route. By way of example, here's one nea

[Tagging] Garmin waypoints and routes (was: "Roles of route members" and before that "Merging tagging scheme on wiki pages of Hiking")

On 19/08/2019 19:04, Peter Elderson wrote: Ok, I accept I just don't know how it's done. So how is that done? How do I tell my Garmin to guide me along, say, the Limes trail through the Netherlands? Essentially, you'd just look at the screen and follow that!  I tend to use waypoints for an

Re: [Tagging] bear box in campground ?

On 21/08/2019 19:03, Mark Wagner wrote: On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 11:44:41 -0600 Rob Savoye wrote: Many western state campgrounds have metal bear proof food storage boxes in each campsite, but not all of them. At certain times of the year this can be important. :-) Around here the bears will dest

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Document personal tags in Proposed_features/ space, User: space, or Tag:/Key: space?

On 25/08/2019 23:18, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: What should we do with a page like Tag:landcover=dunes? I already tried adding a mention that natural=dune was more common and mentioned on the Talk page that "dune" is a landform, not a landcover, but this was reverted. I'd be tempted to set a redir

Re: [Tagging] Walking & Cycling Node Network tagging: undoing the hijacking of rcn and rwn

On 29/08/2019 15:52, Peter Elderson wrote: LS With the arrival of cycling node networks, the Dutch, German and Belgian mappers decided to claim (hijack)  the network value rcn for those node networks. This exception was copied with the claim of network=rwn for the walking node networks. Woul

Re: [Tagging] Draft proposal for Key:aerodrome

On 10/09/2019 08:35, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: It would deprecate aeroway=airstrip and aerodrome:type=* That seems like a bad idea because aerodrome:type is one of the ways that mappers distinguish between military and non-military airfields. That, combined with whether the object has an iata

Re: [Tagging] Draft proposal for Key:aerodrome

On 10/09/2019 11:28, Joseph Eisenberg wrote: That seems like a bad idea because aerodrome:type is one of the ways that mappers distinguish between military and non-military airfields. military=airfield + landuse=military is the standard way to do this. I wasn't making any comment about what ma

Re: [Tagging] [Key:phone] - Suggesting wiki page changing

On 22/09/2019 11:20, Andy Mabbett wrote: On Sat, 21 Sep 2019 at 19:49, Valor Naram via Tagging wrote: I want to change the wiki page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:phone throw a Proposal process to do certain things: - Protecting the wiki page against "wild changes" We generally d

Re: [Tagging] Default values for surface by road category and country

On 23/09/2019 09:14, Volker Schmidt wrote: every mapper can set his own, as you doe and I do, but this means that a router has to second guess what people think is standard use in different countries. That is exactly how it works. In general, tagging surface is

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On 26/09/2019 16:48, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Paul Allen wrote: BTW, that's on national cycle route 82, so whether or not it really is a pub would be of interest to some mappers. Oh, has that closed? That's a shame. (I stayed in St Dogmaels a few years ago, thought the Castle Inn looked wonderf

Re: [Tagging] Was there every a proposal for the disused:key=* / abandoned:key=* lifecycle prefixes?

On 26/09/2019 17:09, Markus wrote: Thus, those disused toilets could be tagged: disused:building=toilets No, it's still a building.  "building=toilets" means that the type of the building was "toilets".  It doesn't say anything about whether it was a usable amenity or not. and separately

Re: [Tagging] Cycling relation misuse

On 11/10/2019 12:51, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: 11 Oct 2019, 12:37 by rich...@systemed.net (I have a fair few lines of code in cycle.travel's rendering and routing codes to blacklist certain routes in OSM which are made up or otherwise unsuitable.) Can you list made-up lines

Re: [Tagging] How to tag pedestrian lanes?

On 21/10/2019 14:14, Paul Allen wrote: (for the kerb separated way, no idea about the marking separated way) Me neither.  I'm not sure we have them. They do exist - I believe that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/172228211 (or one of the sections to the north) is or was like that. 

Re: [Tagging] Hunting stands, bird and wildlife hides

On 22/10/2019 15:36, Ilya Zverev wrote: For some reason people don’t write its purpose on a side. And again, images in three of these pages are the same. This probably varies around the world, but I suspect in many places the intended use is pretty obvious (if not actually written on the side,

Re: [Tagging] amenity=hospital on things that are not hospitals - is it a good idea?

On 28/10/2019 10:11, marc marc wrote: Le 28.10.19 à 09:44, Mateusz Konieczny a écrit : "sign having a hospital icon and no name can simply be tagged type=destination_sign + amenity=hospital" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:destination_sign Yes it's horrible the next line said dest

Re: [Tagging] Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?

On 05/11/2019 13:00, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: I just created https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bicycle%3Ddismount to document why it is used and why it is anyway duplicate of bicycle=no. On the page I claim that "In some places it is illegal to both ride and push bicycle, there is no good

[Tagging] Traffic Signs (was: Re: Is there a good way to indicate "pushing bicycle not allowed here"?)

On 07/11/2019 10:26, marc marc wrote: Hello, Le 06.11.19 à 19:55, Mark Wagner a écrit : There are places like federal Wilderness Areas in the United States where possession of a bicycle is forbidden can you share the a picture of this traffic sign ? As an aside, it's worth mentioning that the

Re: [Tagging] Traffic Signs "pushing bicycle not allowed here"

On 07/11/2019 13:39, marc marc wrote: Le 07.11.19 à 14:01, Andy Townsend a écrit : you won't see a unique sign that identifies "you can't cycle here" an good practice rule is "don't map the legislation", isn't it ?? If you can infer defaults from

Re: [Tagging] How to tag Seveso sites ?

On 08/11/2019 09:44, Shawn K. Quinn wrote: My first guess is it's at least roughly analogous to a Superfund site in the US. That's what I thought at first reading too, but perhaps its meant more to describe somewhere where a disaster might happen rather than one where one already has? The

  1   2   3   4   >